A British Employment Tribunal has upheld Apple's decision to dismiss a retail store employee who violated company policy by posting derogatory comments about his employer on the Facebook social networking site.

The employee, named Crisp, lodged a complaint with the tribunal after he was fired for gross misconduct when negative posts to a private Facebook page were passed along to the Apple Store manager by a coworker. Though Crisp had argued that the dismissal was unfair because the messages were private, the tribunal decided that the communication was not protected because friends could have easily copied and shared it.

Also at issue was whether Apple's social media policy prohibiting "commentary on Apple products, or critical remarks about the brand," was valid, as noted byPeople Management. Report author Jamie Hamnett, an employment partner at law firm Addleshaw Goddard LLP, wrote that the tribunal upheld Apple's policy partly because its brand and image are central to its success.

"[Crisp] retained his right to freedom of expression under Article 10, but Apple successfully argued that it was justified and proportionate to limit this right in order to protect its commercial reputation against potentially damaging posts," the report said.

ifoAppleStorenoted that Apple does allow employees to post on the Internet, but forbids employees from mentioning the company's name or their employment at Apple.

Apple has in the past faced numerous legal complaints from employees over alleged unfair dismissals and discrimination. For instance, earlier this year, a former employee at an Apple Store in St. Louis, Mo., accused Apple of race and gender discrimination. Late last year, the company also received complaints of age discrimination and alleged unfair treatment of an employee with a medical condition.

According to Apple's most recent 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission, 36,000 of its 60,400 full-time employees work at its retail stores. As of the end of the September quarter, the iPhone maker had a total of 357 stores worldwide.

News of the tribunal's decision comes as Apple's retail business appears to have been left without a leader. Former Apple senior vice president of retail Ron Johnson left the company on Nov. 1 to be come the new CEO at retailer J.C. Penney. Apple quickly removed his name and picture from its list of executive profiles without adding a replacement.

Johnson had played a pivotal role in setting up the Apple Store model. Late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs hired him away from Target in 2000 to help launch the company's retail division.

The company said earlier this year that it was "actively recruiting" for Johnson's successor. Apple even reportedly turned to an executive headhunting firm to take its search overseas.

The employee, named Crisp, lodged a complaint with the tribunal after he was fired for gross misconduct when negative posts to a private Facebook page were passed along to the Apple Store manager by a coworker. Though Crisp had argued that the dismissal was unfair because the messages were private, the tribunal decided that the communication was not protected because friends could have easily copied and shared it.

"Crisp" lost the "it's private" argument fast because of how his manager found out. Worked just like the Tribunal described.

Heck, forwarding of anything you email or post on the Internet can get passed around *fast*. Even when posting under my alias, I'm still careful.

Wow. No wonder we get so much positive feedback from employees at Apple stores... who would dare say something negative!

Don't be so cynical.

These social media policies are pretty standard. I work for a Fortune 500 company and we're bound by the same kind of rules. Strictly speaking, we're not allowed to comment (positively or negatively) about The Company's products or services if we identify ourselves as affiliated with The Company, except when we are acting in our job function to (for example, Media Relations or a salesperson).

Friends could repeat something the (former) employee said to them privately? That is the rationale? It's scary enough that someone could be fired for private comments, but that a court would judge against them is downright terrifying.

You could rob a bank and tell your friends. If they rat you out, you will know that you have chosen your friends poorly.

In this case, I don't know who is the bigger idiot: the fired retail employee or his friend. Regardless, he has lost both an employer and a friend. In terms on knowing when to keep your mouth shut, this is an unmitigated FAIL. Hopefully he can recover and get a job sweeping floors at the local Tesco.

Freedom of speech doesn't stop with Facebook. However, freedom to talk about your boss, thats now wrong. So if we disagree with our boss we either have to quit our job or keep our mouth shut. It sounds like some middle eastern country. Or maybe a communist country. If the boss didn't like it then big deal as long as the employee does his job, so what. The employee was not a billionaire who could have hired the best legal group in the world to fight a principle matter. Apple has really good lawyers. Where is the balance in that.